Britain’s competitive position continues to be weakened by failure to up-skill the workforce. Now fundamental change is in prospect for TECs and the whole system of post school education and training. As existing agencies jockey for position, will business be genuinely involved?
MERGERS WITH CHAMBERS
The British Chambers of Commerce want to merge the enterprise functions of training and enterprise councils (TECs), enterprise agencies and Business Links with local chambers of commerce to create a single local business support organisation in each area. In a submission to the governments post-16 review at the end of April, the Chambers say these new bodies would help plan economic development and provide support to small firms. They would also join with the public and voluntary sectors in delivering post-16 education and training through new Local Learning and Skills Councils – assuming these are set up following the review.
The chambers’ submission recognises the importance of increasing social cohesion and overcoming disadvantage. It argues that these new combined bodies could play an important role in promoting corporate community involvement and in facilitating sponsorships, secondments, volunteering and partnerships with the other sectors. Contact BCC on 0171 565 2000
EVOLUTION, NOT REVOLUTION
The CBI has warned the government not to put at risk the extensive business involvement in local learning and skills which the TECs have secured. Any change must be evolutionary, not revolution, it argues in its post-16 review submission at the end of April. The CBI says post-16 education and training must be demand-led, based on publicly funded entitlements, with scope for employer-led discretionary action. Any new national agency must ensure funds follow the learner, rather than attempt manpower planning. At local level, strong executive employer-led councils must have the capacity to manage provision, with enough discretionary money to respond to local needs. Contact Peter Clark, CBI, on 0171 395 8247
NEW PEOPLE AT TOMORROW’S PEOPLE
Ian Reeves, chief executive of High-Point Rendel and a member of the CBI National Council, has become the new chairman of Tomorrow’s People, the training and employment organisation. Originally set up by GrandMet (now Diageo) in 1984, it operates as a fully independent charity supported by companies and last year helped nearly 39,000 people through its employment projects. Ian Reeves takes over from Michael Guthrie of Welcome Break who served for four years. Also joining the board in April were Patricia Vaz of BT and Frank Hemsworth from Unipart. Contact Petra Briggs, Tomorrow’s People, on 01323 641 697
RESIGNING MATTER
The entire board of SOLOTEC in south London resigned on April 29, after the education and employment secretary, David Blunkett MP, declared he had lost confidence in the their ability. The crisis was provoked by a decision to pay the chief executive nearly ?300,000 in severance pay when he failed to secure the top job in the planned merged with the local Business Link. As private sector bodies, TECs are in theory free to set their own terms and conditions for staff. Contact SOLOTEC on 0181 3153 9232
Comment
When the government delayed announcing the outcome of its review of TECs earlier this year, it was clear radical change was in prospect. As this issue of Briefing went to press, a formal statement was expected within days. The outcome is an important test of the government’s ‘third way’ stance that business knows best.
The previous government tried to involve business people directly, but left a confusing set of structures locally (TECs delivering DfEE programmes and Business Links working to a DTI agenda). The arrival of RDAs (reporting to DETR) has since exacerbated the problem. Despite the rhetoric, Whitehall has never really let go.
So the case for change is clear, pulling in other post-16 education and training too. Expect some coming together of national funding for further education colleges (but not, unless the government is much much braver than its record suggests, the universities, who value their separate status too highly, nor sixth form colleges where local education authorities would not go quietly either).
The big question is how to deliver training, enterprise support and careers advice at local level. And how to ensure the services are demand-led, not supply-driven, as the CBI fears. Judge the package on whether there is real local discretion for companies to say what they need and for partnerships with public and voluntary sector to devise effective strategies. Without this, the company executives who volunteered in their hundreds to make the old system function, as best they could, will now withdraw, leaving a we-know-best public sector in charge.
With the end of an era in prospect, there’s a nice juxtaposition between the government forcing the board of a supposedly independent business-led agency into an act of collective suicide, while Tomorrow’s People goes from strength to strength. Can you blame volunteer executives who want to make a real difference, if they choose to help genuinely independent voluntary bodies, working on the front-line?
When the government delayed announcing the outcome of its review of TECs earlier this year, it was clear radical change was in prospect.
When the government delayed announcing the outcome of its review of TECs earlier this year, it was clear radical change was in prospect. As this issue of Briefing went to press, a formal statement was expected within days. The outcome is an important test of the government’s ‘third way’ stance that business knows best.
The previous government tried to involve business people directly, but left a confusing set of structures locally (TECs delivering DfEE programmes and Business Links working to a DTI agenda). The arrival of RDAs (reporting to DETR) has since exacerbated the problem. Despite the rhetoric, Whitehall has never really let go.
So the case for change is clear, pulling in other post-16 education and training too. Expect some coming together of national funding for further education colleges (but not, unless the government is much much braver than its record suggests, the universities, who value their separate status too highly, nor sixth form colleges where local education authorities would not go quietly either).
The big question is how to deliver training, enterprise support and careers advice at local level. And how to ensure the services are demand-led, not supply-driven, as the CBI fears. Judge the package on whether there is real local discretion for companies to say what they need and for partnerships with public and voluntary sector to devise effective strategies. Without this, the company executives who volunteered in their hundreds to make the old system function, as best they could, will now withdraw, leaving a we-know-best public sector in charge.
With the end of an era in prospect, there’s a nice juxtaposition between the government forcing the board of a supposedly independent business-led agency into an act of collective suicide, while Tomorrow’s People goes from strength to strength. Can you blame volunteer executives who want to make a real difference, if they choose to help genuinely independent voluntary bodies, working on the front-line?
COMMENTS